PDA

View Full Version : Hey guys!



Yellonet
01-10-2005, 01:39 PM
Been a while since I was here... and hrmm... I haven't played PF since the day they released Half-Life 2.

What have I been missing?
Anybody care to tell me and get me back in the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

CKY_86
01-10-2005, 01:58 PM
hi yellnet welcome back

F4U_Flyer
01-10-2005, 10:30 PM
Patch 301 - no torpedo planes , 2 weeks , patch 302b - no torpedo planes , 2 weeks , patch 303 - no torpedo planes - corsair cant takeoff from jeep carriers , 3 weeks , ? Now you're up to date !

HotelBushranger
01-11-2005, 04:12 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ^ Don't listen to that grumble-bum!

Just the same great game you left! lol I remember I finished HL2 the day I got it and went STRAIGHT back to PF

JunkoIfurita
01-11-2005, 05:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Just the same great game you left! lol I remember I finished HL2 the day I got it and went STRAIGHT back to PF <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm with you on that one. HL2 was fraggin' fantastic, but sooo short. So I come back to IL2/PF, which just keeps going, and going, and going, and going.

I'm still far from closing off any of my original FB campaigns, let alone any PF campaigns.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif and that's if you ignore the wonderful world of HyperLobby

ElAurens
01-11-2005, 05:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F4U_Flyer:
- corsair cant takeoff from jeep carriers <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As has been posted repeatedly, the F4U NEVER OPERATED from the class of CVE we have in the sim. The Casablanca class was the smallest class of escort carrier used by the USN. What do we have to do, hit you over the head with a large log to drive the point home that they could not take off from this class in real life?

Yellonet
01-11-2005, 06:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F4U_Flyer:
Patch 301 - no torpedo planes , 2 weeks , patch 302b - no torpedo planes , 2 weeks , patch 303 - no torpedo planes - corsair cant takeoff from jeep carriers , 3 weeks , ? Now you're up to date ! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ouch...

Yellonet
01-11-2005, 06:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F4U_Flyer:
- corsair cant takeoff from jeep carriers <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As has been posted repeatedly, the F4U _NEVER OPERATED_ from the class of CVE we have in the sim. The Casablanca class was the smallest class of escort carrier used by the USN. What do we have to do, hit you over the head with a large log to drive the point home that they could not take off from this class in real life? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I guess that's alright then... but the torpedo planes... *sigh* http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Atomic_Marten
01-11-2005, 06:57 AM
Geez man, you have been away for quite a while..http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/images/smiles/welcomeback.gif

John_Stag
01-11-2005, 08:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F4U_Flyer:
- corsair cant takeoff from jeep carriers <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As has been posted repeatedly, the F4U _NEVER OPERATED_ from the class of CVE we have in the sim. The Casablanca class was the smallest class of escort carrier used by the USN. What do we have to do, hit you over the head with a large log to drive the point home that they could not take off from this class in real life? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe that one should be made a sticky.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

F4U_Flyer
01-11-2005, 10:04 PM
"As has been posted repeatedly, the F4U _NEVER OPERATED_ from the class of CVE we have in the sim. The Casablanca class was the smallest class of escort carrier used by the USN. What do we have to do, hit you over the head with a large log to drive the point home that they could not take off from this class in real life? "

I will give you the point that they never took off from a casablanca class cve. Since you appear to be the expert on this subject can you show me where 40' would put the plane hugging the water and not making it 4 out of 5 times?


---------------------------------------------------------------
A production contract was awarded to Chance Vought in June 1941 and the first production machine flew in June 1942 with a top speed of 415 mph, a sea-level climb rate of 3,120 ft/min and a service ceiling of 37,000 ft. The first carrier trials were carried out in September 1942 aboard the USS Sangamon.

http://www.aviation-history.com

---------------------------------------------------------------

CVE-26 USS Sangamon
Sangamon Class Escort Carrier (ex-Cimarron Class Fleet Oiler):
Displacement: 22,400 tons
Length: 553'
Beam: 114'3"
Draft: 32'
Speed: 18 knots
Armament 2x1 5"/38, 7x2 40mm, 2x4 40mm, 21 20mm, 30 planes (12 TBF, 18 F6F)
Complement: 1,080
Geared turbines engines, twin screws, 30,400 hp
Maritime Commission T3-S2-A1 type
Built at Federal Shipbuilding & Drydock Co. and commissioned as AO-28 23 Oct 1940
Converted to Escort Carrier CVE-26 in 1942
ex-SS Esso Trenton

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/CVE/CVE-26_Sangamon.html


--------------------------------------------------------------


Casablanca Class:
First Escort Carriers designed and built from the keel up as such.
Displacement: 10,982 tons (full load)
Length: 512'3"
Beam: 65' at water line
Draft: 22'4"
Speed: 19 knots
Armament 1 5"/38 DP, 8x2 40mm, 20 20mm, 28 planes
Complement: 860
Skinner Unaflow reciprocating engines, twin screws, 11,200 h.p.
Max cruising radius: 10,200 miles @ 15 knots; 7,200 miles @ 19 knots



http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/ships-cv.html

-------------------------------------------------------------

If you can prove this point i will never complain about the corsair ( on this point ) again! ......maybe.....Oh and dont forget the 1 knot higher speed.

ElAurens
01-11-2005, 10:16 PM
It's that 41 extra feet of deck you are forgetting about... As I pointed out in my post the Corsair did not operate from the Casablanca class.

And those flights were carrier trials, which BTW the Corsair failed, and lead to the F4U being used on land bases only by the Marines, untill the Brits figured out how to safely operate the F4U from larger carriers.

Operationally the F4U was used on CVs and CVLs.

And I don't claim to be an expert, but I do pick up a book now and then.

F4U_Flyer
01-11-2005, 10:22 PM
"It's that 41 extra feet of deck you are forgetting about"

------------------------------------------

"I will give you the point that they never took off from a casablanca class cve. Since you appear to be the expert on this subject can you show me where " 40' " would put the plane hugging the water and not making it 4 out of 5 times?"

------------------------------------------

Got that part . I always thought the reason for not using them on carriers was because of landing troubles not take off's. If your saying 40' would put them in the drink i guess i'll just have to take your word for it!

WUAF_Badsight
01-11-2005, 11:22 PM
the ad-nauseum is getting thru then . . . . .

ElAurens
01-12-2005, 05:23 AM
F4U_Flyer, do yourself a favor and pick up a copy of the F4U Pilots Operating Handbook. Reprints of it are available from most any source that sells aviation literature. I picked up mine at the USAF Museum bookstore when I was last there. It lists all the pertinant performance data for the type, including take off distances at various headwind speeds and weights. The F4U really had long T.O. rolls with no wind, (like a static carrier in the game). At maximum gross weight it could not take off from a modern 1000 foot USN carrier if it were stationary, and you started from the very end of the flight deck. The manual lists the no wind T.O. distance for a max load F4U at 1110ft.

Even at minimum gross weight the no wind T.O. roll is 680ft. Longer than any CVE.

And you are correct about landing the F4U. It is far too easy in the game compared to the F6F, for example.

JG51Beolke
01-12-2005, 07:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F4U_Flyer:
Patch 301 - no torpedo planes , 2 weeks , patch 302b - no torpedo planes , 2 weeks , patch 303 - no torpedo planes - corsair cant takeoff from jeep carriers , 3 weeks , ? Now you're up to date ! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LMAO............................

But I'm sure things will be better in 3.04

Fingers crossed.

F4U_Flyer
01-15-2005, 12:21 AM
Well after some more research i have found the cve's in this game served no combat roles in any time frame except the ones equipped with catapaults. cve55 was just a transport and supply ship and the ones in the game as near as i can find served combat roles off iwo jima. I don't understand the resoning for even adding these carriers to the game ! Another example of poor research prior to shipping the game? I dont know the reason but full price for a patch was a little dissapointing! I just hope the patch to come cures some of the shortcomings.

PS it was fun arguing this point and the research added to my knowledge , Thanks!

ElAurens
01-15-2005, 12:43 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif